11–20 of 36 posts
Current approach is a disaster.
I would have asked most at risk population to self quarantine.
Cut on red tape for usage of antivirals. (Hydroxychloroquine a proven safe one said to work has been held back for weeks due to paperwork)
I would have even gone as far as requisitioning private companies to par for the lack of medical supplies and drugs.
The eroding of civil liberties some EU countries is experiencing is plain unacceptable.
But then no country will just say, "let's let our people die." However, unless a vaccine is discovered soon enough or the virus miraculously is manageable, people will be very uneasy.
Eh.... no... that's what Italy tried to do, (tried to stamp out clusters, while keeping everything the same and itdidn't work) Right now they are having massive casualties per day, to almost (if not more) than ww2, and there is no sign of slowing down yet. "Italy reports 5,986 new cases of coronavirus and 627 new deaths, raising total to 47,021 cases and 4,032 dead"
By the way his point is that what happened in Italy is normal, old and frail people will die. No need to ruin everything to--maybe--extend their life for a few more years.
Pay old and sick people to quarantine?
-edit to add-- were saving x lives from Coronavirus at an enormous cost. How many others are dying because they can't get their current health issues dealt with in a normal manner due to the mobilization to fight this virus?
My guess is that a lot of people that normally would have lived, will now die from cancer, diabetes, heart issues etc etc.
Finally, some sanity.
The over 70 and chronically ill should be quarantined and provided with hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin, and the rest should "social distance" those at risk, but otherwise go about their business. That way the virus spreads quickly among the less at risk, they suffer no or minor symptoms, and develop herd immunity.
This article is almost completely rhetoric, bereft of quantitative analysis and at odds with what the broader medical community has been saying. The New York Times really does let any credentialed dingus post shit on their website.
The idea seems to be to somehow isolate at risk populations (the elderly, mostly) and resume business as usual. As pointed out by others, it's too late in the absence of a vaccine to do anything but try and reduce the infection rate, unless society decides to just let the cards fall where they may and sacrifice the old and sick.
How long it goes on would depend on the effectiveness of this strategy, and you can tell be monitoring the infection rate. China claims that it has essentially stopped new infections after ~3 months, so this doesn't seem like it will be an indefinite lockdown.
Eh.... no... that's what Italy tried to do, (tried to stamp out clusters, while keeping everything the same and itdidn't work) Right now they are having massive casualties per day, to almost (if not more) than ww2, and there is no sign of slowing down yet. "Italy reports 5,986 new cases of coronavirus and 627 new deaths, raising total to 47,021 cases and 4,032 dead"
Edit to add: US Population 65 years and over: 16.03% (male 22,678,235/female 28,376,817) (wikipedia)
Total Staffed Beds in All U.S. Hospitals: 924,107 (aha.org)
Eh.... no... that's what Italy tried to do, (tried to stamp out clusters, while keeping everything the same and itdidn't work) Right now they are having massive casualties per day, to almost (if not more) than ww2, and there is no sign of slowing down yet. "Italy reports 5,986 new cases of coronavirus and 627 new deaths, raising total to 47,021 cases and 4,032 dead"
No, Italy's real issue is they're have the oldest population in Europe and the highest per/capita smokers in Europe. Since Covid-19 hits that demographic hardest (elderly with respiratory issues), they have the highest mortality rate. The average age of those dying from this in Italy is 80.